Well, in that case, it was clear game playing. Who doesn't know what a photocopier is? We don't know what the context was, but given the transcript we were given, the supposed "Ti user" was very clearly playing a game.

Perhaps he had reason to, perhaps not. Maybe saying that there was a photocopier in use would have led to consequences, and most of the case was spent with the prosecutor just trying to make the defendant say something like that.

I'm not so sure it was. His lawyer, yeah, probably. But I have brain farts like that all the time, and I actually can see myself needing some simple clarification to make sure we're all talking about the same thing.

I get the impression this guy was just an office worker who may or may not have much of any idea what the lawsuit is about. If he was some main player in the lawsuit, then yeah, I'd find it hard to believing it wasn't some semantic tomfoolery. But I can see myself being questioned like this and- if I'm not given a full context beforehand (to cancel out certain possibilities that occur to me)- all sorts of extra things go through my mind about what might qualify as "photocopier."

I actually have had Te doms simply repeat my question back at me- instead of giving me the simple clarification I need- with a really angry tone (as if they can't believe anyone could be that stupid). What this forum is helping me glean is that it really is that difficult for them to "drop everything" and search their internal data banks for other words to describe what they mean (because their goal is rushing past this solitary point to complete some bigger picture)- that the emotional charge I'm looking at isn't directly disbelief that I'm so stupid, but anger that I'm holding up the progress they crave/need (and probably some disbelief that I don't have that same goal in mind).

Well, in that case, it was clear game playing. Who doesn't know what a photocopier is?

"Xerox that file" has been used in office settings for years. Did you notice the guy said, "Xerox" at the end of the video?

The word "xerox" is commonly used as a synonym for "photocopy". For example, check the following sentences:

"I xeroxed the document."
"Please make a xerox copy of the articles"

Both are common usages but the word ‘Xerox’ is actually the brand name of a company which provides the photocopier machines!

In 1959, Chester Carlson developed the process of xerography. With this technique, the Xerox company introduced the first plain paper photocopier machine. The popularity of these photocopiers led ‘Xerox’ as a synonym for ‘photocopy’. But the company does not excuse such uses of its trademark and always trying to convince the public that Xerox should not be used as a verb. The ‘Xerox’ company declared that-
"You cannot 'xerox' a document, but you can copy it on a Xerox Brand copying machine".
(Note that xerox is functionally a verb in this sentence.)

In spite of their efforts, many dictionaries continued to mention the use of "xerox" as a verb, including the Oxford English Dictionary.
I still say ‘xerox’ as a verb, but I'm trying not to use the brand name. Personally, I don't think that there is any single term which most people use for photocopying. Some people would say xerox, some just say copy. Even some people also do say "photocopy".

Personally, I found the whole video absurd/comical. Xerox has been used as a verb (just like Google is used as a verb, today) for decades, so I laughed out loud listening to that guy yelling his head off when he should have been yelling at himself for being an ignorant ass.

"Xerox that file" has been used in office settings for years. Did you notice the guy said, "Xerox" at the end of the video?

Personally, I found the whole video absurd/comical. Xerox has been used as a verb (just like Google is used as a verb, today) for decades, so I laughed out loud listening to that guy yelling his head off when he should have been yelling at himself for being an ignorant ass.

I was thinking that it would have been easy to just say a macine that makes copies or something like that. Because, I was thinking copy machine vs. photo copying vs. xerox, etc. could have legal consequences. So answering from the beginning, that there was a xerox machine could have been a trap.

Outside of legal circles though, I would think it was verbal game playing. Unless, of course, you're telling me that it's common for office workers to not realize that a xerox machine is a photo copier. Then, I'd have learned something new.

Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.Robot Fusion
"As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
"[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
"[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

I saw this video when it came out months ago, and I saw it again a few weeks ago, and my renewed curiosity led me to the full transcript.

The case was about the Cuyahoga County Recorder's Office of Cuyahoga County, Ohio charging for copies of the documents they recorded. David Marburger was the lawyer representing a couple of companies that were in the business of repackaging the records—deeds, property transactions, etc.—and selling the information to banks and other lending agencies. The county recorder's office had been charging people $2 per page of photocopies, and at some point the head of the recorder's office decided that the $2 per 'page' charge should be meted out for every 'copy', including burnt CDs with digital 'copies'. The recorder's office argued that "a copy is a copy". One of the companies Mr. Marburger represented wanted a CD copy of over 100,000 digitized 'pages' of documents, and so the recorder's office was going to charge them over $200,000 for it.

What was really ridiculous about this was that the office burned CD copies for themselves every single day anyway. The only cost to the office was the cost of the blank CD-Rs (or CD+Rs, or CD-RWs; they argued about that in the deposition too).

The guy who was being deposed, Larry Patterson, was the manager of the IT department. He had very clearly been coached by his lawyer and was absolutely jerking Marburger around. Patterson attributed the difference in terminology to a generational thing.

Here's what followed that exchange, to give you an idea of the tone of the rest of the deposition:

Q: Xerox. Is the machine made by the Xerox
Company? Is that why it's called Xerox?
A: No.
Q: So xerox, in the parlance that you've described,
the language that you've described, is being used
generically as opposed to describing a particular
brand; is that right?
A: All of my life I've just known people to say
xerox. It's not commonplace to use the terminology
that you're using.
Q: You mean it's more -- people say xerox instead
of photocopy?
A: If you're referring to a type of machine where
you place a piece of paper on the top and press a
button and out comes copies of it, they usually refer
to it as xerox.
Q: Have you ever heard it referred to as
photocopying?
A: Not with my generation, no.
Q: And you've never heard anybody in the Recorder's
office refer to that as photocopying; is that true?
A: I don't remember any specific instance where
that's referred to as photocopying.
Q: Have you ever heard it referred to as
photocopying in any office context?
A: I've always heard of it as xerox.
Q: Let me be clear: You've never heard of that
called photocopying; is that correct, Mr. Patterson?
A: When people speak of using a type of machine
that you described, they speak of it as could you
make a xerox of that or could you xerox this for me.
Q: But you've never heard them refer to that as
photocopying; is that correct?
A: I'm sure it's been said. I don't remember any
specific instance. What i remember is it referred to
as xeroxing a piece of paper to make additional
copies.
Q: I know. You've told us that.
Let's be very clear here. You've never heard
that process called "photocopying." Is that true or
false?
A: I'm sure the term has been used by someone.
Q: Because you've heard that or you're just
guessing?
A: I do not remember a specific instance where
someone used the term "photocopying." My generation
and people around me typically refer to placing an
image on the top of a machine and having two or three
copies come out as xeroxing.
Q: Okay. Would it be synonymous in your
understanding with xeroxing to call that
photocopying?
A: I don't know. I don't know what the legal
definition of photocopying is.
Q: I don't know if there is a legal definition.
I'm talking about what lay people say.

MR. CAVANAGH: Aren't we
asking the Ohio Supreme Court to
decide that issue?
MR. MARBURGER: No.
MR. CAVANAGH: No?
MR. MARBURGER: You might
be. I'm not.
MR. CAVANAGH: Why don't you
just call it a copy machine. Why do
you have to call it a photocopier?

BY MR. MARBURGER:
Q: I can call it anything I want to call it. I
want to see if you understand what I'm talking about.
A: I call it a xerox.
Q: Do you happen to know the names of the units
that you have that xerox? Do you happen to know what
they are -- what brand they are and what model or
unit they are?
A: I should, but right now, due to the pressure
that you're placing me under, it's not coming to
mind.
Q: I'm not placing -- am I placing you under
pressure, Mr. Patterson?
A: I think it begins with an M. I can't remember
currently.
Q: Do you feel that I'm placing you under pressure?

MR. CAVANAGH: Be honest.

A: Yes. This is not my normal environment. I'm
not a lawyer and, you know, I'm nervous that my
answers -- you will try to use in a way in which I
wouldn't intend them to be.
Q: Well, you're in control of that. If you give us
an honest, forthright, clear answer, you'll decide
whether your testimony can be used in a strange or
odd way. That's up to you, not up to me.

Marburger was happy to let Patterson prolong the deposition, because the more Patterson talked the more he made himself look like a deliberately evasive idiot. According to Marburger in reality he never shouted at Patterson, and Patterson was not very nervous at all:

"My game plan became to see how far he'd go with what I perceived as a charade caused by the way his lawyers had prepared him to be deposed," said Marburger. "The purpose of stringing it out was to show that he'd go to great lengths to avoid admitting the obvious, which would then make the recorder's office look bad in the eyes of the Ohio Supreme Court justices."

Marburger, a partner at Cleveland-based BakerHostetler, said Patterson played right into his hands as he sat back in his chair and kept delivering questions in a bemused manner. And he said Patterson wasn't nervous or intimidated, either.

"I actually wanted him to keep up what I perceived as a charade. Once he chose the path that he took, I didn't want a straight answer; I wanted him to keep it going," said Marburger. "That was why I kept pushing over the course of 10 pages of transcript. To me, the testimony became too good to be true. It was perfect."

When I saw the video my first reaction was "why the hell doesn't the lawyer immediately improvise a definition like a machine to produce a copy from the content of one page onto another page" and yes, in a legal context I too would be very careful about my wording and have the other person phrase their question as specific as possible. It basically irritated me as much to see the lawyer guy avoid providing a clear definition as it irritates Te users to see the witness refuse an answer

The longer extract and additional info provided by @93JC helped a lot in understanding the background of that exchange.

Case in point: I own a 3-in-1 machine that I primarily use to scan documents and images but that is also a printer and can theoretically be used as a copier when it scans and prints an original. However, the printing function currently isn't working. Do I own a photocopier? And imagine millions of dollars depending on the answer!

The good life is one inspired by love and guided by knowledge. Neither love without knowledge, nor knowledge without love can produce a good life. - Bertrand RussellA herring's blogJohari / Nohari

The following is a re-enactment of an actual exchange in a courtroom in Rome, Georgia last month. The defendant, Denver Fenton Allen, is accused of murdering another inmate at the Floyd County Jail last year. He was being held there on charges of making terroristic threats. He has a long rap sheet going back to 2002, and was previously incarcerated at the Augusta State Medical Prison from 2009 to 2015.

I learned how to do that from my INTJ dad. I can answer the question you wanted to ask or I can answer one of the many ways the question can be twisted and contorted to. Depends on whether or not I want to answer the actual question.

I think my mom's a Ti-tert and she does this; or she'll answer in a way that hinges on her personal definitions and associations that I don't share or even know. It's annoying as fuck.